THE DCIT, Hyderabad V. M/s Kakinada Seaports Ltd, Hyderabad

ITA 86/HYD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 134 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9945 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-01-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: K V N CHARYA
• Assessee Lawyers: A V RAGHURAM
• Keywords: Depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.86/HYD/10 : ASSTT. YEAR 2006-07 DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX CIRCLE 2(1), HYDERABAD V/S. M/S. KAKINADA SEA PORTS LTD., HYDERABAD. ( PAN AABCC 2005 Q ) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI K.V.N.CHARYA RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A.V.RAGHURAM O R D E R PER G.C.GUPTA, VICE PRESIDENT: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 06-07 IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX(APPEALS). 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE AS UNDER- '1. THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APP EALS) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) OUGHT NOT T O HAVE HELD THAT RAILWAY SIDING HAS TO BE TREATED AS PLANT AND CONSEQUENTLY DIRECTED TO ALLOW DEPRECIATION AT THE RATE APPLICABLE TO PLANT.' 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSE E HAS RELIED ON THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A). HE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT THE I SSUE INVOLVED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS COVERED IN FAVOU R OF THE ASSESSEE BY ITA NO.86./HYD/10 M/S. KAKINADA SEA PORTS LTD., HYDERABAD. 2 THE DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE CALCUTTA HIGH COURT IN CIT V /S. BIRLA JUTE AND INDUSTRIES LTD. (260 ITR 55); AND OF THE HON'BLE KARNA TAKA HIGH COURT IN CHIEF COMMISSIONER (ADMN) AND OTHERS V/S. VISVESWARAYYA IRON AND STEEL LTD. (199 ITR 98) AND THE DECISION OF THE RAJKOT BE NCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN KANDLA PORT TRUST V/S. ACIT (104 ITD 1). 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE WHETHER RAILWAY SIDINGS ARE PART OF THE PLANT IN TH E CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISIONS CITE D (SUPRA), RELIED UPON BY THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE. HON'BLE CA LCUTTA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V/S. BIRLA JUTE INDUSTRIES LTD. (SUPRA) HELD THAT RAILWAY SIDINGS HAVE TO BE TREATED AS PART OF 'PLANT'. NO D ECISION TO THE CONTRARY HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE. IN THESE FACTS OF THE CASE, WE HOLD THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN FOLLOWING THE DECISIONS OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURTS CITED ABOVE AND IN HOLDING THAT RAILWAY SIDINGS ARE PART OF 'PLANT'. ACCORDINGLY GROUN DS OF APPEAL OF THE REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUE'S APPEAL IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7.1.2011 SD/- SD/- (CHANDRA POOJARI) (G.C.GUPTA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT DT/- 7TH JANUARY, 2011 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. M/S. KAKINADA SEA PORTS LTD., 8-2-419, 3RD FLOOR, MEENAKSHI HOUSE, ROAD NO.7, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD. 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE 2(1), HYDER ABAD ITA NO.86./HYD/10 M/S. KAKINADA SEA PORTS LTD., HYDERABAD. 3 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-III, HYDERABAD. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX II, HYDERABAD 5. THE DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ITAT, HYDERABAD. B.V.S